BREAKING: TRUMP WINS! Supreme Court Rules 6-3 on Presidential Immunity

Wasn’t there a thread recently about repealing a precedent that closed an alphabet agency legal loophole?

Is this the swamp draining? Clean up in isle 10!

a reply to: IndieA

a reply to: JinMI

Where are the court rulings showing that this in fact occurred.

He was asking him to reject the results as being tainted and in serious need to have further review. There are lots of reasons to not doubt they have to cheat to win. The D's can't win without cheating in every state. Maybe the R's do too, but only in R states, IDK?

The D's policies are more important than what the people want so they decide to take matters into their own hands and that is Treason. They D's and several R's are traitors to their oaths. They do not honor the COTUS but to thoroughly poop on it.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: theatreboy

According to Pence, the claim that Trump only tried to "pause" certification is "completely false". You can see him say it in the video.

So is Trump asking Pence to "literally reject votes" an official act?

a reply to: IndieA

I call BS. GOP review found no proof. If there was fraud they would of found it. Why would they say no proof if there was proof? This feels like a circular argument. He says, she says, but no proof?

A Republican-backed review of the 2020 presidential election in Arizona’s largest county ended Friday without producing proof to support former President Donald Trump’s false claims of a stolen election.

GOP review finds no proof Arizona election stolen from Trump

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: JinMI

Here's a great example.

Slick Willy lying about getting a BJ in the oval office.

Can we agree that it does not fall within the scope of official duties?

Can we call that one a personal matter that kept us out of Whitewater hot water? Remember the other scandals and the real body count?

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Mahogani

It makes more sense to categorize a POTUS as a king (with co-equal kings) with public scrutiny. Power of the pardon and commander in chief being evidence of this. While they can't act as unilaterally as a king, the power to act still remains.

The irony of you of all people accusing anyone of misinformation notwithstanding......

Thanks for not letting idiots call "rabbit and squirrel" while the big picture is there to see live. Distracting from the facts are all they will ever have now. The power of the brainwashed masses has died. The sleepers are awakening by the 10's of millions. Not just in the US either.

originally posted by: Mahogani

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Mahogani

It makes more sense to categorize a POTUS as a king (with co-equal kings) with public scrutiny. Power of the pardon and commander in chief being evidence of this. While they can't act as unilaterally as a king, the power to act still remains.

The irony of you of all people accusing anyone of misinformation notwithstanding......

It makes sense to you to make Biden king?

That pandora's box has been open for quite some time. The POTUS is almost King is how I read that and have known it to be since about 5th grade History class. But then they actually taught things to my generation that you can keep with you all of your life that are important for later. If you want to know them. Some of my generation wrote songs about not knowing history or geometry.

a reply to: IndieA

Its almost like judges are gate keepers to a corrupt system ran by corrupt lawyers where if they thought we knew the truth there with be a total breakdown of their corrupt system. The one time I think “you can’t handle the truth” really applies.

Shrugs.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: JinMI

Where are the court rulings showing that this in fact occurred.

All over this site for starters.

Pennsylvania
Michigan
Arizona
Minnesota

a reply to: JinMI

Point me in a direction where one of these cases is located, that actually found election fraud.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: IndieA

I call BS. GOP review found no proof. If there was fraud they would of found it. Why would they say no proof if there was proof? This feels like a circular argument. He says, she says, but no proof?

A Republican-backed review of the 2020 presidential election in Arizona’s largest county ended Friday without producing proof to support former President Donald Trump’s false claims of a stolen election.

GOP review finds no proof Arizona election stolen from Trump

The audit found a bunch of issues with the election, however officials didn't want to deal with them, and the media didn't even acknowledge them in their efforts to push their narrative and agenda.

You can read the full audit reports here and here

Some issues were even refereed to the AG, but he seemed to care more about going along with the status quo and playing with nun-chucks, then bring very challenging truths to light.

Now that I think of it, there were some election integrity efforts made in Arizona. Legislators managed to pass a bill that would have held Arizona elections to DOD standards, but it was vetoed by Governor Katie Hobbs.

a reply to: grey580

I really despise posting stuff that is readily available and of common knowledge....

georgiarecorder.com...

can't wait till this gets turned around on trump and his allies, because now its gonna be nearly impossible to punish biden if he decided to eliminate trump for the constant insults and the targeting of his family, or just being a threat to America in general. trump better hope biden is above such actions.

a reply to: namehere

If only Trump had a Jim and a Hunter.......

a reply to: Dalamax

If anything, the past seven days have been an unprecedented power grab by SCOTUS.

They have named themselves the ultimate arbiters of government regulations and whether a President's actions are official or unofficial. While also opening the doors on legalizing gratuities (aka bribes after the fact) to government employees.

I won't be surprised if down the road these decisions are seen on a similar level to Marbury v. Madison in regards to the Judiciary seizing power from other branches.

originally posted by: Threadbarer

I won't be surprised if down the road these decisions are seen on a similar level to Marbury v. Madison in regards to the Judiciary seizing power from other branches.

Doesn’t the Supreme Court kinda “enforce” the constitution that limits the power of government. So the Supreme Court is grabbing power by limiting government. Ok….

a reply to: Threadbarer

That's weird.

What I saw was removing power from the executive and putting it back in its rightful place of congress.

Then I saw one specific immunity aspect which reflects judicial and congressional immunity where the rest were then handed back to the lower courts to state whether or not acts were included or excluded with a factual basis.

Your predictions are terrible historically.....

a reply to: Threadbarer

Rulings on Constitutionality based soley on the COTUS aren't power grabs, but what the Dems have been power grabbing just sure as I am sitting while typing.

a reply to: IndieA

Jesus, it's a 99 pages of data that's all over the place. I need to digest this.

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: IndieA

Jesus, it's a 99 pages of data that's all over the place. I need to digest this.

It mostly covers questionable votes, electronic server manipulation evidence, and missing chain of custody records, if I'm not mistaken.

I added the kinematic artifact detection report link as well, which covers the findings on the paper ballots.

It's an even better report, but it's still just a preliminary report, I recommend the kinematic artifact detection presentation over anything else, as that was the most revealing.